Science versus politics

As Liberal Sen. Jim Munson said in an interview with The Canadian Press, Conservative senators have “killed” Bill S-204, which would have authorized a national strategy for treating a condition called chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency or CCSVI.

More to the point, the bill would have forced the initiation of formal trials of a controversial treatment for CCSVI called “liberation therapy,” in which constricted neck veins are widened using balloon angioplasty to improve blood flow from the brain. The treatment is based on a questionable theory championed by Dr. Paolo Zamboni of Italy that CCSVI may cause multiple sclerosis.

“Since Day 1, the Conservatives have played politics with MS patients,” said Liberal Sen. Jane Cordy, a Sydney native who sponsored the bill. “The Conservative senators on that committee threw the science away and have used politics, politics, politics.”

But haven’t opposition politicians — both on the federal and provincial levels — been using politics to advance the position that liberation therapy is beneficial and that clinical trials on the treatment should be conducted using MS sufferers here at home to help prove the theory?

Indeed, the Conservatives insist that the opposite of what Cordy was accusing them of is true: that they’re conceding to science on this one as opposed to political pressure.

That’s not to say Conservative senators always concede to the majority view of the scientific community. The Tory members in the house of “sober second thought” ignored an awful lot of science — arguably in favour of politics — when they recently recommended a massive multi-year seal cull in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence.

On the issue of liberation therapy, though, truly dispassionate science is largely skeptical at best. There is increasing evidence that MS is primarily an autoimmune disorder.

And the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a warning back in May that injuries and deaths have been associated with liberation therapy. At least two Canadians died from complications stemming from the treatment — one is Costa Rica and one in the U.S. In Canada, the procedure is considered experimental and is not approved for MS patients.

Unlike the Senate, the Conservative government did bow to earlier political pressure and agreed to a small-scale clinical trial, though there’s been little movement on that front.

Scientists seem to agree that the best way to determine the efficacy of liberation therapy is via a comprehensive double-blind clinical trial. A research team in Albany, N.Y. is conducting just such a study over two years and involving 130 patients, some of whom are Canadian. The Saskatchewan government agreed to spend $2.2 million to have 86 Saskatchewan patients take part in the American trial.

Why would Canadian researchers submit more patients to a questionable, risky procedure for the type of study that’s already underway south of the border?

Comments

Comments

Your name*Email*Comment*

Recent comments

AP

November 24, 2012 - 19:42

WHEN the CB Post staff member who wrote this piece has spent three years (three to four constant hours a day) studying not just MS, but CCSVI, MS and CSVI, about the role of blood flow in MS and the many new science-based studies by independent thinkers with no ties to BigPharma, then you might be able to publish a truthful, balanced opinion piece about MS and CCSVI. But only after you’re done lots of homework, There’s no increasing evidence that MS is autoimmune! It is a theory that has never been proven. The Neurology/ BigPharma league (and sadly, MS Societies) fight anything new (like CCSVI) because they all have too much to lose. One or their autoimmune drugs, an interferon called Avonex, brutalized my body for two months until I said enough and stopped it. And surprise, surprise, CCSVI treatment in Rhode Island has had only positive benefits for me. Many more people have died from these horrible drugs than from CCSVI. Your information wasn't factual information. Do your homework.

You can certainly tell this is an opinion/editorial article and certainly not "real" journalism since the "facts" are WRONG! I must assume your publishers are aligned with the ignorant and conflict of interest-riddled naysayers that have the power to stomp on any hope Canadians with MS have for an improvement in quality of life.
I am walking proof that this procedure can produce improvements when nothing else could--and I have the medically documented evidence to prove it. So do many others. The Canadian government has shown its true alliance--pharmaceutical backers over suffering citizens. I'm so glad other countries aren't as cruel.

"There is increasing evidence that MS is primarily an autoimmune disorder."
Really, please enlighten us.
There is considerable evidence that drug companies making drugs to manipulate the immune system are convinced that the autoimmune THEORY is proven, but that doesn't make it so.

First of all, as I understand it, the two people that died did so due to lack of care available in their own countries. These deaths were unfortunate but, when there has been any discoveries in the medical world, isn't that a chance we take? I wish that we could make all the naysayers walk a mile in our shoes, strap on the heavy suits of armour and try to live a normal day performing normal daily activities.

To answer your question "Why would Canadian researchers submit more patients to a questionable, risky procedure for the type of study that’s already underway south of the border?", because it is uninformed media like you who call this questionable. For example, my wife was treated in Albany in mid-July 2011, sixteen months ago and is doing very well. I know dozens of Canadian diagnosed with MS, which many of us call a doubtful diagnostic, who have been treated and responded very, very well. I do not know any Canadian who have died as a result of the intervention. The deaths of four North American was not due to the intervention but, rather, from a lack of care or, more accurately, the refusal of care by the same doctors who have taken an oath no to do any harm, by commission or omission. Rather than spout the government line, the media should really inform themselves.

Because even the results of Albany studies comes out, people like you and conservative senators will ignore it in favor of big pharma and ineffective and costly drugs. After all MS is no longer a just a disease, it is a multi- billion industry! No one talks about the number of people treated for ccsvi condition and doing much better, just the # of deaths! In total (US and Canada combined) 3. How many ms patient were killed by drug called Tysabriover 100 in 2 years. We already have solid research from states (Hubbard Foundation) showing promising out comes. Do we look at them? No. I would say why do research at all. Let's just be ignorant!